Sigh. The saddest part about men's hoops at Tulane is that we're going to get panned for firing Dunleavy (if we do). He's so well connected.

Thankfully the ladies are 11-3 and alive in the NCAA race. Need baseball to push for a regional as well.

If we don't clean house, then our small hoops fanbase will vanish and games next year will be actually empty. Baseball revenue will exceed hoops revenue.

(01-08-2019 07:59 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 07:30 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Katz has us as an 11 in the play-in game...how does that line up with Net rank of 34?

It does not line up. The integrity of the NET and the NCAA will be on the line Selection Sunday if there is significant variance between the NET ranking and the schools picked and seeded.

They have already said that they will be using NET like the RPI. It will be used to determine whether a team is a good win or loss but it won't be used directly to rank teams

(01-08-2019 10:02 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 07:59 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 07:30 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Katz has us as an 11 in the play-in game...how does that line up with Net rank of 34?

It does not line up. The integrity of the NET and the NCAA will be on the line Selection Sunday if there is significant variance between the NET ranking and the schools picked and seeded.

They have already said that they will be using NET like the RPI. It will be used to determine whether a team is a good win or loss but it won't be used directly to rank teams

Could you please provide the source? The below indicates otherwise.

NET Explained

Quote:The NCAA has developed a new ranking system to replace the RPI as the primary sorting tool for evaluating teams during the Division I men’s basketball season

Quote:“What has been developed is a contemporary method of looking at teams analytically, using results-based and predictive metrics that will assist the Men’s Basketball Committee as it reviews games throughout the season,” said Dan Gavitt, senior vice president of basketball for the NCAA. “While no perfect rankings exist, using the results of past tournaments will help ensure that the rankings are built on an objective source of truth.”

Quote:The NCAA Men’s Basketball Committee has had helpful metrics it has used over the years, and will continue to use the team sheets, but those will now be sorted by the NCAA Evaluation Tool,” Gavitt said. “As has always been the case, the committee won’t solely focus on metrics to select at-large teams and seed the field. There will always be a subjective element to the tournament selection process, too.”

(01-08-2019 10:02 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 07:59 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 07:30 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Katz has us as an 11 in the play-in game...how does that line up with Net rank of 34?

It does not line up. The integrity of the NET and the NCAA will be on the line Selection Sunday if there is significant variance between the NET ranking and the schools picked and seeded.

They have already said that they will be using NET like the RPI. It will be used to determine whether a team is a good win or loss but it won't be used directly to rank teams

Oh, so they will still be using the 'eye test'?

(01-09-2019 02:23 AM)fishpro1098 Wrote:  Oh, so they will still be using the 'eye test'?

Definitely. The only way you get teams with worse computer rankings in the tournament.

(01-09-2019 08:44 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 02:23 AM)fishpro1098 Wrote:  Oh, so they will still be using the 'eye test'?

Definitely. The only way you get teams with worse computer rankings in the tournament.

The "eye" test is invalid in college basketball because it is impossible to watch sufficient games to obtain a representative sample of a team's worth. The eye test is just a way for the Selection Committee members to indulge their bias toward conference affiliation, ratings, mascots, etc.

I don’t disagree with Katz at all regarding UC. I’m not sure UC is a tournament quality team. I think we’re proly realistically NIT this year. All I’m pointing out is a Net score of 34 (supposedly THE system for seeding/rating) is at significant variance with Katz’s 10 or an 11 seed.

IE he is clearly using eye test, not Net score.

(01-08-2019 09:59 PM)oliveandblue Wrote:  Sigh. The saddest part about men's hoops at Tulane is that we're going to get panned for firing Dunleavy (if we do). He's so well connected.

Thankfully the ladies are 11-3 and alive in the NCAA race. Need baseball to push for a regional as well.

If we don't clean house, then our small hoops fanbase will vanish and games next year will be actually empty. Baseball revenue will exceed hoops revenue.

I doubt much dissent arises from firing Dunleavy. He has seriously underperformed and I think most pundits value their credibility more than loyalty to a former colleague.

(01-09-2019 09:00 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  I don’t disagree with Katz at all regarding UC. I’m not sure UC is a tournament quality team. I think we’re proly realistically NIT this year. All I’m pointing out is a Net score of 34 (supposedly THE system for seeding/rating) is at significant variance with Katz’s 10 or an 11 seed.

IE he is clearly using eye test, not Net score.

actually it's not that much of a variance. 10 seeds would be from 37-40. With the First four in there- 37-41. That's not much off at all.....

(01-08-2019 10:21 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 10:02 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 07:59 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 07:30 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Katz has us as an 11 in the play-in game...how does that line up with Net rank of 34?

It does not line up. The integrity of the NET and the NCAA will be on the line Selection Sunday if there is significant variance between the NET ranking and the schools picked and seeded.

They have already said that they will be using NET like the RPI. It will be used to determine whether a team is a good win or loss but it won't be used directly to rank teams

Could you please provide the source? The below indicates otherwise.

NET Explained

Quote:The NCAA has developed a new ranking system to replace the RPI as the primary sorting tool for evaluating teams during the Division I men’s basketball season

Quote:“What has been developed is a contemporary method of looking at teams analytically, using results-based and predictive metrics that will assist the Men’s Basketball Committee as it reviews games throughout the season,” said Dan Gavitt, senior vice president of basketball for the NCAA. “While no perfect rankings exist, using the results of past tournaments will help ensure that the rankings are built on an objective source of truth.”

Quote:The NCAA Men’s Basketball Committee has had helpful metrics it has used over the years, and will continue to use the team sheets, but those will now be sorted by the NCAA Evaluation Tool,” Gavitt said. “As has always been the case, the committee won’t solely focus on metrics to select at-large teams and seed the field. There will always be a subjective element to the tournament selection process, too.”

I read it shortly after they released it .. let me see if I can find the source. Though really .. your last quote proves my point. They are using it to "sort the data on the team sheets". I.e. instead of them using RPI to determine team quadrants they will be using NET. Then they go on to say "wont solely focus on metrics to select and seed. There will be a subjective element". That means they will do the same thing they are doing with RPI. They use it to "sort", which means they use it to determine how good/bad a win/loss is but they don't just use it to directly seed teams.

The NET won't be used to select the teams.....

But the NET will be used to form the tiers for the records....

tier 1 opponents are-
top 30 NET teams at home
top 50 NET teams neutral
top 75 NET teams away

(01-09-2019 10:27 AM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 10:21 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 10:02 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 07:59 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 07:30 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Katz has us as an 11 in the play-in game...how does that line up with Net rank of 34?

It does not line up. The integrity of the NET and the NCAA will be on the line Selection Sunday if there is significant variance between the NET ranking and the schools picked and seeded.

They have already said that they will be using NET like the RPI. It will be used to determine whether a team is a good win or loss but it won't be used directly to rank teams

Could you please provide the source? The below indicates otherwise.

NET Explained

Quote:The NCAA has developed a new ranking system to replace the RPI as the primary sorting tool for evaluating teams during the Division I men’s basketball season

Quote:“What has been developed is a contemporary method of looking at teams analytically, using results-based and predictive metrics that will assist the Men’s Basketball Committee as it reviews games throughout the season,” said Dan Gavitt, senior vice president of basketball for the NCAA. “While no perfect rankings exist, using the results of past tournaments will help ensure that the rankings are built on an objective source of truth.”

Quote:The NCAA Men’s Basketball Committee has had helpful metrics it has used over the years, and will continue to use the team sheets, but those will now be sorted by the NCAA Evaluation Tool,” Gavitt said. “As has always been the case, the committee won’t solely focus on metrics to select at-large teams and seed the field. There will always be a subjective element to the tournament selection process, too.”

I read it shortly after they released it .. let me see if I can find the source. Though really .. your last quote proves my point. They are using it to "sort the data on the team sheets". I.e. instead of them using RPI to determine team quadrants they will be using NET. Then they go on to say "wont solely focus on metrics to select and seed. There will be a subjective element". That means they will do the same thing they are doing with RPI. They use it to "sort", which means they use it to determine how good/bad a win/loss is but they don't just use it to directly seed teams.

I see your point. Sorting is another word for ranking, I suppose. Regardless, it is the most important metric and significant deviation from the results should be questioned, IMO.

Duplicity cannot be ruled out when it comes to the Selection Committee.

(01-09-2019 10:48 AM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 10:27 AM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 10:21 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 10:02 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:  

(01-08-2019 07:59 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:  It does not line up. The integrity of the NET and the NCAA will be on the line Selection Sunday if there is significant variance between the NET ranking and the schools picked and seeded.

They have already said that they will be using NET like the RPI. It will be used to determine whether a team is a good win or loss but it won't be used directly to rank teams

Could you please provide the source? The below indicates otherwise.

NET Explained

Quote:The NCAA has developed a new ranking system to replace the RPI as the primary sorting tool for evaluating teams during the Division I men’s basketball season

Quote:“What has been developed is a contemporary method of looking at teams analytically, using results-based and predictive metrics that will assist the Men’s Basketball Committee as it reviews games throughout the season,” said Dan Gavitt, senior vice president of basketball for the NCAA. “While no perfect rankings exist, using the results of past tournaments will help ensure that the rankings are built on an objective source of truth.”

Quote:The NCAA Men’s Basketball Committee has had helpful metrics it has used over the years, and will continue to use the team sheets, but those will now be sorted by the NCAA Evaluation Tool,” Gavitt said. “As has always been the case, the committee won’t solely focus on metrics to select at-large teams and seed the field. There will always be a subjective element to the tournament selection process, too.”

I read it shortly after they released it .. let me see if I can find the source. Though really .. your last quote proves my point. They are using it to "sort the data on the team sheets". I.e. instead of them using RPI to determine team quadrants they will be using NET. Then they go on to say "wont solely focus on metrics to select and seed. There will be a subjective element". That means they will do the same thing they are doing with RPI. They use it to "sort", which means they use it to determine how good/bad a win/loss is but they don't just use it to directly seed teams.

I see your point. Sorting is another word for ranking, I suppose. Regardless, it is the most important metric and significant deviation from the results should be questioned, IMO.

Duplicity cannot be ruled out when it comes to the Selection Committee.

While i agree with the concept. They are literally saying it's replacing RPI. RPI was NEVER used to rank seeds and such. There was always some significant deviation. This wont change that.

Updated through 1/8/19.

I think the change for Memphis is due to wins last night by many of the Tiger high profile opponents.

Houston 4-4 0
UCF 41-33 +8
Cincy 25-35 -10
Temple 62-60 +2
Memphis 96-70 +26
Tulsa 90-74 +16
USF 102-97 +5
UConn 91-110 -19
SMU 137-121 +16
Wichita 133-131 +2
ECU 243-230 +13
Tulane 291-296 -5

109.58 as of 1/1
105.08 as of 1/8

1st team number is 1/1(night before conference play started)
2nd team number is current

Hey '83, FYI, this is 2019, lol.

(01-09-2019 12:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Hey '83, FYI, this is 2019, lol.

Fixed. It is never a good idea to post data while eating pancakes at Bob Evans.

The NET is out for today.
AAC 104.83
P12 104.41

Odds tremendous that the AAC will pass the Pac 12 after tonight's action.....

team wise-
Houston from 4 to only 9
Temple from 60 to 41
UCF is up to 31. 1 more would be huge as would get both home and away games with them as tier 1.....

Updated through 1/9/19....